Tories create committee to scrap gun registry.

[D.B.]

But it's not the same as registering the car at all! A potential gun owner has a deep background check and if he fails on something he's not allowed to legally own a gun. Any shmuck can own a car.

Really? Cause when I register a car they have my whole driving record right there? If I've had my license suspended I can't register it. Any shmuch can't own a car... and should we really let any shmuck own a gun?

And criminals have shown a clever way around the gun registry - they DON'T BOTHER REGISTERING THEIR GUNS! And these are the people who will be shooting others, not law abiding citizens.

You're absolutely right. A criminal would not register a gun. I've said it. I openly admit it. Is that what you're looking for. You keep coming back to the same tired arguments.

Criminals get guns illegally... maybe by stealing it maybe it comes up from the US. Who knows. The point is with a registry of legal guns you know where it came from. You know who it belongs to.

IF this 'criminals don't register; argument is so strong can you explain why the law enforcement is strongly behind the hand gun registry? Would a criminal with a hand gun suddenly feel obligated to register it?

[Wilber]

"Wilber..........registration just does not work. It cannot work. If you like I can give you the technical reasons. But rest assured. The RFC said it woudl cost BILLIONS of dollars to try it the way they did. I am certain that when the AG accounting comes out we will once again be proven right.

There is simply no way to do it on the cheap. There is no way that the data in it can be used for anything but confiscation and then only from those who obey the laws.

The police in fact do NOT use the system for the purpose it was intended. The much flaunted 5000 uses per day is an outright distortion. The real question is HOW MANY TIMES IS IT USED TO SOLVE A CRIME>"

I agree, it's a waist of money. I have never heard of it being used to solve a crime but if it had, I am sure our previous government and the pro registry crowd wouldn't have been shy about letting us know.

The police do in fact use it, because it is there, so why wouldn't they. When it comes to telling them if they may be facing a gun in a particular situation, it is not a lot of use to them. They always assume there is a gun, they have to. I know this because my son is a police officer and I have asked him if they use it. I also know that he would trade the registry for a few more cops on his shift without much thought at all.

[geoffrey]

Well, that makes it clearer for me, although I've always known the gun registry was a waste of money since the gun owners that shoot people simply don't register their guns.

But not registering criminals because of 'rights' issues, while registering gun owners kind of sounds like if you own a gun you're guilty until proven innocent, not to mention the fact that the criminal gets their rights respected over gun owners. Every now and then you here of a violent sex offender who is being released and all the cops can do is warn the public he's in the area. Can't register him, but watch out if you own a gun. What a country we live in.

Why? Does it require police to warn public if a gun owner is moving into the nieghborhood?

Yup shooters definitely don't register their illegal weapons before. But that gets lost in some blind ignorance of the gun=always evil crowd.

People fear gun owners more than sex offenders.

--

The police officer that was shot in Quebec was killed by a gun a judge let the criminal have, and wasn't in the registry...

The 4 mounties kill in Alberta, were killed by unregistered guns by a man that should have been in jailed for many years prior...

The innocent kid that was shot in Toronto on Boxing day, by far one of the most henious crimes in the last little while, was not killed by a registered gun.

IT DOESN'T WORK!! More police work. Real sentances work! 3 strikes and life in jail works! Arresting these teenage thug wanna-be gangsters and relocating them to work camps works!

I'm ok with a background check and safety course for your PAL. This is reasonable. The registry however, is a complete farce.

I sure hope you don't feel any safer knowing that maybe the registry has some farmers gun he uses to shoot pest animals! I hope your ok with the billions this has cost you!

[IPSC STORM]

Really? Cause when I register a car they have my whole driving record right there? If I've had my license suspended I can't register it. Any shmuch can't own a car... and should we really let any shmuck own a gun?

Sorry but once again you are just dead wrong. You base your ideas once again on the lies and common mistaken perceptions of those who either do not know the facts OR do not want you to know the facts.

ANYONE that is even a person with the most disgusting driving record in the world can buy a car. There is no legal way in Canada to prevent it. So in fact any shmuck can in fact own a car.

NO WAY you say?

Well hate to burst your bubble but that is the fact.

The question comes about when said individual wants to DRIVE it on PUBLIC streets. BINGO then you need to have valid registration and a tag. Otherwise you are free to have as many cars as you like and drive them in what ever manor you wish. As long as you stay on private property.

To parallel with firearms.................

My guns are either in my home ( private property) locked up in tranisit or at my gun club ( again private property), So the true equal would be that when handguns are used for defensive purposes as a concealed weapoin ( CCW) they would need to be registered and a permit issued to the owner. Yep, I could live wth that. But the ANTI crowd would have fits. So again, the car/gun analogy just does not work.

Of course if you do not register your car you get a ticket. IF you do not register your gun you go to jail and have a criminal record. Once again. Apples and Pineapples.

If you want to have a REAL debate why don't you drop the games and address some of the issues that have been brought up

Ok.........I thought I had. My bad

Please be so kind as to list any and all issues and I will address them point by point. That would be far more efficient and everyone can stay on track. Deal??

BTW...I am not angry at all. Frustrated that people spout off incorrect data with out any real idea as to the truth? Yes indeed. Frustrated that these same people want to take away my rights? Yeppers. But angry? No not yet. I do admit that I often use CAPITALS to stress a salient point. Is that the problem?

[ritamd]

Good stuff this will bring them down even faster when people start shooting each other with long guns again

[scribblet]

Well, that makes it clearer for me, although I've always known the gun registry was a waste of money since the gun owners that shoot people simply don't register their guns.

But not registering criminals because of 'rights' issues, while registering gun owners kind of sounds like if you own a gun you're guilty until proven innocent, not to mention the fact that the criminal gets their rights respected over gun owners. Every now and then you here of a violent sex offender who is being released and all the cops can do is warn the public he's in the area. Can't register him, but watch out if you own a gun. What a country we live in.

Why? Does it require police to warn public if a gun owner is moving into the nieghborhood?

Yup shooters definitely don't register their illegal weapons before. But that gets lost in some blind ignorance of the gun=always evil crowd.

People fear gun owners more than sex offenders.

--

The police officer that was shot in Quebec was killed by a gun a judge let the criminal have, and wasn't in the registry...

The 4 mounties kill in Alberta, were killed by unregistered guns by a man that should have been in jailed for many years prior...

The innocent kid that was shot in Toronto on Boxing day, by far one of the most henious crimes in the last little while, was not killed by a registered gun.

IT DOESN'T WORK!! More police work. Real sentances work! 3 strikes and life in jail works! Arresting these teenage thug wanna-be gangsters and relocating them to work camps works!

I'm ok with a background check and safety course for your PAL. This is reasonable. The registry however, is a complete farce.

I sure hope you don't feel any safer knowing that maybe the registry has some farmers gun he uses to shoot pest animals! I hope your ok with the billions this has cost you!

Good post. The problem is, people don't seem to understand the part about criminals not registering their guns - The CPC willl get a lot of support on this issue, a good move for them.

[D.B.]

Storm (great name by the way) that's not quite my point. Of course there are differences, but what I'm asking is why is it so oulandish to ask someone to register a gun when other private posessions are?

And whether or not anyone can register a car is moot. Criminals shouldn't be able to legally own a gun so I would hope there are different standards in place.

My guns are either in my home ( private property) locked up in tranisit or at my gun club ( again private property), So the true equal would be that when handguns are used for defensive purposes as a concealed weapoin ( CCW) they would need to be registered and a permit issued to the owner. Yep, I could live wth that. But the ANTI crowd would have fits. So again, the car/gun analogy just does not work.

You making an really interesting point here. And I agree the car analogy falls apart. Let bring in another one though. How about exotic animals like snakes and tigers and whatever. People keep them in the privacy of their own homes but are still required to register them.

Frustrated that these same people want to take away my rights?

I just have to point out that the right to bear arms has not been enshrined in the Canadian Constitution. So it's not a right to be taken away.

... But angry? No not yet. I do admit that I often use CAPITALS to stress a salient point. Is that the problem?

Maybe confrontational is a better word. You have to understand the 99% of the people who have any support for the gun registry don't own guns. So, no they don't understand the ins and outs of the registry like a gun owner simply because because it doesn't apply to them, but they do understand the idea of guns, they understand what they can do and the idea of having them registered. And it doesn't sound so bad. You've got this blanket dismissal for any opinions that differ from your own. You say they're just plain wrong. Thesse people have an opinion and view of society as well... it may differ from yours but it isn't any less valid!

You've got our ear and we're all hanging around waiting for you to make some sort of logical argument that gun registration (in the general sense) is a bad thing. No one is going to argue that the Liberal's gun registry was well done, but why are you opposed to the idea of gun registration in general?

[FTA Lawyer]

Storm (great name by the way) that's not quite my point. Of course there are differences, but what I'm asking is why is it so oulandish to ask someone to register a gun when other private posessions are?

And whether or not anyone can register a car is moot. Criminals shouldn't be able to legally own a gun so I would hope there are different standards in place.

My guns are either in my home ( private property) locked up in tranisit or at my gun club ( again private property), So the true equal would be that when handguns are used for defensive purposes as a concealed weapoin ( CCW) they would need to be registered and a permit issued to the owner. Yep, I could live wth that. But the ANTI crowd would have fits. So again, the car/gun analogy just does not work.

You making an really interesting point here. And I agree the car analogy falls apart. Let bring in another one though. How about exotic animals like snakes and tigers and whatever. People keep them in the privacy of their own homes but are still required to register them.

Frustrated that these same people want to take away my rights?

I just have to point out that the right to bear arms has not been enshrined in the Canadian Constitution. So it's not a right to be taken away.

... But angry? No not yet. I do admit that I often use CAPITALS to stress a salient point. Is that the problem?

Maybe confrontational is a better word. You have to understand the 99% of the people who have any support for the gun registry don't own guns. So, no they don't understand the ins and outs of the registry like a gun owner simply because because it doesn't apply to them, but they do understand the idea of guns, they understand what they can do and the idea of having them registered. And it doesn't sound so bad. You've got this blanket dismissal for any opinions that differ from your own. You say they're just plain wrong. Thesse people have an opinion and view of society as well... it may differ from yours but it isn't any less valid!

You've got our ear and we're all hanging around waiting for you to make some sort of logical argument that gun registration (in the general sense) is a bad thing. No one is going to argue that the Liberal's gun registry was well done, but why are you opposed to the idea of gun registration in general?

The idea of registration in theory is not objectionable...the problem for most gun-owners is that we already had full registration of handguns since the 30's, and of gun owners since the late 70's (through the former FAC and now PAL licenses). The long-gun registry was seen as a significant step towards government confiscation of firearms.

This concern was not just from the paranoid...former Justice Minister Allan Rock specifically stated that, in his view, only police and military should be able to possess a firearm in Canada.

The government was fully able to see that I had a Firearms Acquisistion Certificate (FAC) by searching their records, and the public at large should be satisfied with that. I cannot see a need for nor benefit from having each of my firearms registered individually that would justify establishing a whole new massive bureaucracy where one already existed.

I had to take a training course, pass a government-regulated exam, interview in person with an RCMP firearms officer, disclose any mental health or criminal history as part of a thorough background check and have memebers of my family I was living with at the time confirm they were okay with me owning a gun in order to get my FAC...all of which I'm okay with...as are almost all law-abiding gun owners.

The laws that were in place regarding safe use and storage of firearms were some of the most restrictive and comprehensive in the world. I've posted them in detail before and don't intend to repeat myself.

In this context, when one acknowledges that criminals don't register (as you have intelligently done) there really is no functional purpose for the gun registry aside from making future government confiscation possible...THAT's what has law-abiding gun owners in a real tizzy over the long-gun registry.

Add to this the inconceivable deception by the government in respect of its costs, and you can hopefully better understand the desire to end the registry ASAP.

Also, keep in mind, that us law-abiding gun owners, who actually do intimately know the "industry" told the powers at be over and over that they had grossly underestimated the number of gun owners and guns, warned that many would not voluntarily comply with registration and made all of the arguments we are still making now (put more cops on the street, more money into prosecuting and jailing actual offenders etc. etc.)

Too bad it has taken blowing a couple billion dollars for the largely urban-dwelling non-gun-owning population to listen to what we were saying.

Unfortunately, all too often events like the killing of the Mounties in Mayerthorpe are used as rallying points for tighter gun control, including maintaining and expanding the long-gun registry. Logic tells you though that no such measures would have or ever could have prevented the tragedy.

Rosko was in possession of prohibited weapons (i.e. illegal for ANYONE in Canada to possess) and was under a current firearms and ammunition prohibition at the time that he unceremoniously gunned down those officers.

In spite of it seeming like a waste of the money already spent to scrap the registry now, pouring 90 million dollars of good money after bad EACH YEAR from now one just makes no sense. End it, end it now, spend money on things that might actually have a positive effect on gun violence.

FTA

[IPSC STORM]

Criminals most certanily should not own firearms. I would much prefer them to be locked away in jails. I had the unfortunate experience of having to watch my 15 year old daughter go though court just last week to convict a 17 year old who sexually assaulted her in school. ( the court date was Feb 15th). In the end he was convicted on two charges of sexual assault, one court of simple assault and one of breach of probation.....

His sentence??

Six months!! Which they then said was equal to 3 months pre trial custody and since he had been in jail for 89 days prior to the trial. THEY LET HIM GO THE VERY NEXT DAY!!

Meanwhile I would be looking at 5 years for not having a bit of paper? Sorry but that just does not wash with me.

( BTW.............the saving grace of my daughters case is he had to submit a DNA sample to the sexual offender registry. Now THAT is a registry I can get behind)

Exotic animals are not a vaild counter point either. This can be proven by a simple virtual experiment.

Say I load one of my handguns or "DEADLY MILITARY ASSAULT RIFLES" ( don't run away this is a virtual experiment LOL ) I leave it sitting on my kitchen table.

Now you take a vemonous snake......or a nice "tame" tiger and do the same thing.

Now............you enter the room.

Which item is most dangerous to you?

Is there a possiblitiy that the gun will train itself on you and shoot you of its own accord? Nope. It is an inanimate object. It cannot do anything unless an outside force acts upon it.

Can the snake or the tiger decide to attack you and in fact DO SO. Moving upon its own will?

Are you in fact in danger by the very fact that you are in the same room?

Most certainly YES!

So no the analogy does not work at all. The funny thing is the fiearm is in fact better compared to the CAR. The problem being that as you point out the vast majority of people do not know a blessed thing about them thus they make incorrect assumptions. They do in fact not know the existing law. They do not know the history of gun control in Canada or the world for that matter. Thus they make extremely erroneous assumptions. This leads us to the mess that we have now.

I do not have a blanket dismissal for people who disagree with me. Rather for people who are factually incorrect. I know it is a fine line but there it is. I do not base my arguments ( ok most of them) on emotion but on hard facts.

You say that I do not have a "right" to bear arms. Well once again..........I hate to shock you but you are in fact technically in error.

True this right is not "enshrined" in the constitution however the constitution is only a building block in the history of our rights. The "right" for Canadian citizens to bear arms can be traced through the BNA act all the way back to the Magna Carta. Since this right has never been extinguished it must still exist.

Of course it would be much easier if it were actually in the constition. But its lack does not take away from the fact that I still have this right ( I used to know a great site on this topic I will try to find it and post it later)

Now ...........why am I personally opposed to registration? Well taking away from the pure fact that it is technically impossible for it to be of any use to prevent criminal activity ( other than paper offences against the registry itself) there are two main reasons.

One I will admit is based purely on emotion. I have never hurt anyone so why should I be singles out. I am not a threat to anyone who is not a threat to me.

Second is a sense of history both international and Canadian. In every instance in world history the registraion of firarms has directly lead to their confiscation. There is not a single instance when this did not occur. It did not take a rocket scientist to figure out what Canada had planned when C68 was revealed. Sure the Liberals said that they had no plans to confiscate. BINGO............We have plans for confiscation. BTW as per C68 I have 12 of my firearms slated for confiscation even without the latest Liberal plans that were defeated in the eleciton. Beyond that as I live in Ontario I still have to deal with an out of control AG who is bound and bent to take my property. ( I have a meeitng with my MPP on Friday to discuss this fact).

Now to turn the table on you DB.

Please explain a plausible process that you think will allow a registry to achieve any rationals good other than confiscation.

Cheers

[Wilber]

I must admit I’m not too familiar with the specifics proposed. That does sound unjust. My theory behind the idea stems from American justice show or one of those: The detectives had a body with some bullets in it, and they eventually came across a gun that matched the bullets. Then the detectives searched the country for pawn shops to see if this gun had ever been bought and by whom. The search led them to a man who remembered buying the gun from the pawn shop but had lost it. The detectives worked with the man on remembering where he;d last seen it, and that led them to the man that committed the crime. Why couldn’t a registered list of gun owners serve the same purpose?

If it is so wonderful, why are the police not really pushing for it? It could possibly work as you describe but how often are you going to have a situation like this? If you were to give the police departments of this country 2B and an additional 90M a year they could find far more productive uses for it that would make a real difference to our communities.

Ask yourself this. Is the owner of a registered gun likely to commit a crime with it, then leave it at the scene, pawn it or leave it anywhere else the authorities can find it? If the gun was stolen or lost and the theft or loss was reported prior to it being used to commit a crime, it would be the same as if it was never registered at all, unless you knew who stole it. Possible but not likely and you would still have to prove it.

If a police officer runs a check on a car he has pulled over and finds the driver is a registered gun owner, what are the odds of a law abiding person who registers his guns having a loaded rifle or shotgun laying on the back seat of his car? What are the odds of the hood with the loaded handgun tucked beside his seat having registered guns at home?

The concept may sound wonderful to many but when you really hold it up to scrutiny, it ain't worth 2 billion plus 90 million a year.

[Drea]

Beginning again... on a positive note.

IMO the gun registry should be scrapped.

Anyone who purchases a rifle should have to submit such information as DL # or SIN#, address, etc. automatically.

(I'm sure my father has told me that this has been the process for purchasing a firearm for decades. But I could be wrong, perhaps we've never cared who owns guns -- but we should care IMO)

When a gun crime is committed, the police (if they find the weapon) would be able to trace it.

No one is saying that gun owners are committing crimes.

Criminals are getting their guns from somewhere and we need to find out and stop the flow. Perhaps some are smuggled in from the states, perhaps some are stolen from legitimate gun owners. We need to know.

As I've said before, I have no problem with rifles and hunting.

I just don't believe in handguns, but hey, whatever floats yer boat, as long as no one gets hurt.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FYI,

Except for abbreviations, when a poster uses all caps it is the equivelent of yelling.

YELLING! Like THIS.

Bold and italics are used for emphasis.

[IPSC STORM]

I just don't believe in handguns, but hey, whatever floats yer boat, as long as no one gets hurt.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Damn...........I have a bit of a problem with SANTA and the tooth fairy. But I am pretty sure the P99 that I was just cleaning for my son is real.

You failed to explain how the registry would help.

So you find that 100% of handguns used in crimes were stolen ( the actual number is closer to 13% but this is for test purposes so we will set it at 100% for aguement).

What has the registry acomplished?

Nothing nadda................ Are you closer to finding the criminal who commited the crime with the gun?

No.........otherwise you would have put them in jail for the theft itself.

What the old government did instead was to criminalize the victim who was robbed!

Back to your favorite car/gun analogy and learning from TV.

Did you ever note that on TV cop shows when they rob a bank and they find the get away car they generally hit a dead end when they find................shock of shocks that the theives used a stolen car? The cops then say that they hit a dead end.....

It is exactly the same with a gun. A registered stolen gun is a dead end.

Unless.............unless you want to go after the person who was robbed that is.

So continue the car/gun analogy.

You own a Honda Accord that is blue......

A blue Honda Accord is stolen and used in a bank robbery. In the course of the get away they hit a young 17 year old girl on the side of the street who later dies.

What would happen if cars were treated like guns???

Well.........

1) the person who owned the car invovled would be charged with unsafe storage. It would not matter if the car had been locked in their garage. It would not matter if it has been hotwired. The very fact that it was stolen would be enough to prove unsafe storage ( there are zero guide lines to safe storage)

2) The police would then show up at your door and confiscate your Blue Accord as it has now been deemed to be commonly used in criminal activity.

Silly as it sounds this is exactly how the gun law works and is why it must be replaced with laws that actually target criminal activity.

My personal concept is to add 5 or 10 years for the simple possesson of an illegal firaerm.

ie If you have been deemed to be incapable of the responsibility of owning a firarm and are found with one. You go to jail. No ifs. No ands. No buts.

I forgot to add in my earlier post about why the registry is a bad idea the simple concept that it cannot work.

It cannot work for what the Feds say it would be used for.

Why you ask??

Well becuse you cannot tell one gun from another that is why.

Even when they try they mess it up.....

My P08 luger has 7 errors in its registration. That is right they messed up on everything!! I have tried and tried to get them to fix it. The worst part of it is I am liable for their mess up.

As a result when the requirement came for me to register my other guns. I registered them all as Unknown make, unknown model, unkown serial number, unkown action, unkown barrel length, unknow caliber etc.

Their solution?

Well in their wisdom they sent me nice little stickers to place on the firearm with the caveat that I must put the sticker on the reciever of the firearm. They then warn me not to expose said sticker to solvents or oils.

Guess what we clean firerms with???

Yes inded you guessed it...........first you use solvents to clean out the carbon build up. Then you coat it with oil so it does not rust.

What does this prove? It proves the people who wrote the law do not have a clue when it comes to the technical aspects surrounding firearms. As scary a thought as you can get.

If you like ( and I have time) I can recount story after silly story of how the CFC has totally messed this system up..

Peoplel blame gun owners for messing with the system. I will be the first to admit it.........

However........nothing I mean nothing we could do can even come close.

You can try a google on some of the classics.

Mauser rifle serial number series

AR15 lowers.

Walther G22 stocks.

Beretta Storm Magazines.

Benelli M1 super magum shotguns.

[IPSC STORM]

Here is a good radio show interview from today.

http://www.cknw.com/station/audiovault_members.cfm

you have to register ( sorry) but it is easy.

Go to Feb 22nd at 10:07 am

The rep from the Chiefs of Police speaker is an embarasment...............spouting the very disinformation that I spoke about above. Naturally he was cut to pieces.

Even he does not know how many guns used in crimes are registered!! LOL! Too funny really

[Drea]

IPSC STORM,

'cept for the handgun issue, we are on the same page.

The current gun registry is a farce.

I ask you this. What process (I've never tried to buy a gun) does a person go through to get one? What was the process before this gun registry was implemented?

Can (could) anyone without a criminal record buy a gun and ammo and walk out of the store with it with no wait time? Is (was) there a wait time? How long is (was) it?

IMO, the (hated) registry is not registering owners, but guns. My car is registered and I am on the paper as the owner. Once I sell my car (or you sell your gun) I am no longer the registered owner. The registration follows the car/gun, not the person.

I'm really trying to understand and not being facetious with you at all. I understand your frustration in that the police can come into a gunowners home without a warrant.

And I'm not trying to villify gun owners.

I just think that we need to be able to track where the criminals are getting them. I know that finding the owner of a stolen gun doesn't necessarily mean the criminal who stole it will be found, but it's a place to start.

Even in the US (according to Law and Order LOL) when the detectives find a gun they look for the owner -- therefore there must be some kind of database with gun owner info.

It's not a crime to have your gun stolen.

If I find a gun on the side of the road, I'd like it to be returned to the rightful owner. How can that be done unless there's a database of owners somewhere?

Please don't get mad -- I'm asking these questions honestly and without malice.

[IPSC STORM]

Now THIS ( sorry for yelling) is helpful!!

These are legitimate questions and I will cover them one by one.

Thanks for being helpful

I ask you this. What process (I've never tried to buy a gun) does a person go through to get one? What was the process before this gun registry was implemented?

For the purpose of discussion I will assume you want a handgun and I will assume you are in Ontario as that is where I live and know the process intimately.

1) pay from $100 to $150 to take the CFC Non restricted course which would allow you to buy non restricted firearms ( rifles and shotguns) This is a one day 8 hour course which covers the action types of various non restricted firarm. Safe gun handling, history, The firearms act in terms of storage and transport. Funny but you never actually fire a gun.

2) pay another $100 to $150 to take the CFRC Restricted course. Again this is a one day course covering restricted firarms (all handguns and some carbines and rifles like the AR15) Once more you never fire a shot in this course.

3) Fill out your application for a restricted lisence. This will cost you $80. You will need to have two references vouch for you that have known you for more than 2 years. Also you need to list any spouses you have co-habitated over the past 5 or 10 years and provide contact data for them. You also need to provide a passport quality photograph. The photo must be signed again by someone who will attest to it being a photo of you.

4) Sit back and wait. The law says that the minimum is 28 days. That is a flat out joke. Most are taking between 3 and 6 months to process. Then your PAL will arrive in the mail.

5) Shopping for a firearm. Once you have decided on one and paid for it the tranfer process begins. The seller phones the CFC in Miramichi. Since it is a restricted firearm they send it to the CFO in Orillia Ontario ( each province has their own office). They are supposed to do another background check on you but in reality they just take a few days to process it.

6) You are then issued a TAN (transfer authorization number) this is supposed to be proof that the gun is registered to you ( but is actually breaking their own law). Once you have a TAN you can apply for an ATT ( Authorization To Transport.

7) The ATT alows you to take your firearm home with you. It is limited to one day ( if direct) or several days ( if the gun is being mailed).

8) Once you have your gun safely at home you still cannot take it to the range. You need a long term ATT

9) To get a long term ATT in Ontario you need to take the CSSA ( Canadian Shooting Sports Association) handgun course ( I happen tobe qualified to teach this course). This course is 8 hours long and is almost a repeat of the CFRC course. However in this one you are actually taught to shoot a gun. There is also an accuracy test.

10) Once you have passed the CSSA test your club which you joined which cost you from $50 to $500 a year to join ( mine is $160) will apply on your hehalf for a long term ATT. The ATT will arrive from 4 to 8 weeks later.

11) one you have your Long term ATT you can take your handgun from your home to any qualified range in Ontario. You must put a lock on the trigger and then lock the firearm in a case. You must take a direct route to and from the gun club ( I knew of a guy busted for going to a Timmies drive through on his way home). You also need to keep the registration certificate with the firearm.

Now.....how did it work before?

We had an Firearms aquisition system. FAC.

To get an FAC you paid $5 for every 5 years. The first time in you took a test at the local police deptartment and had an interview with the local Firearms officer. The application process took about a month to get.

For non restricteds that was it. When you wanted to buy a firearm ( rifle) you showed your FAC and if it was valid you got your firearm and went hom.

For handguns you applied for a tranfer which went though your local CFO. Then you needed to take it to the police station where they would ensure that it was in fact the firearm you had registered. That would mean an ATT from the store to the police station and then one from there home. I had many many handguns mailed to my local police station. They would call me when they arrived and I would pick them up. BTW the lady who ran that department now takes her two kids to my clubs junior program.

You still had a long term ATT system back then as well but they were only good for one year. The new ones are for Three years.

Can (could) anyone without a criminal record buy a gun and ammo and walk out of the store with it with no wait time? Is (was) there a wait time? How long is (was) it?

See above...........Criminals had their FACs taken away. Just like PALs are supposed to be taken now. Funny again the CFC does not keep track of how many PALs they have taken away.

The funny (sad) thing about the current system is the lack of background checks. They were suspended about 2 years ago. That was about the only part of the system that could actually have done some good. I have never met anyone who has ever had any of their references called and I know thousands of gun owners.

IMO, the (hated) registry is not registering owners, but guns. My car is registered and I am on the paper as the owner. Once I sell my car (or you sell your gun) I am no longer the registered owner. The registration follows the car/gun, not the person.

You can also deregister your car. This is the process you use when you take your car to the wreckers. Theoretically you could do that with your brand new car as soon as you got it home. Then you could sell it to anyone you want. You just could not drive it on public roads. Just think of race cars ( CASCAR) etc. There is a reason they are transported on trailer from homes to the race track beyond saving tires. They are not allowed because they are not registered and lisenced nor do they have to be. They cannot drive on the roads because they are not lisenced.

Registering owners does have some merrit but that is equaled by a registry of criminals and I think that registering criminals is both morally and logically a more sound idea. What is the differnce between checking to see if someone is lawful and checking to see if someone is a criminal? They are flipsides of the same coin.

The only advantage of a Permit system ( which I am not dead set against) is that you can ensure training. I have some problems with forcing people to take a course but it does have some good points. However this program could easily be run by volunteers ( like myself) and could be designed by people who actualy know something about firearms. This would reduce the cost to take payers as well as make a superior course. Like the CSSA course I teach you can actually get people out shooting to see how they handle themselves. The PAL system we have I like to compare to pilots ground school. No solo flight but they hand you the keys to a plane anyway. Not very bright if you ask me. Again self managment by interested parties within constraints of law make more sense.

I'm really trying to understand and not being facetious with you at all. I understand your frustration in that the police can come into a gunowners home without a warrant.

I really do appreciate that fact. The problem is people who have no idea at all about the firearm issue keep spouting off that it is a good idea. They do not know the history. They do not know the current process. They do not know the technical pit falls. Just try reading some of the post here or letters to the editor by anti folks. The errors of a factual nature is downright scary.

And I'm not trying to villify gun owners.

I just think that we need to be able to track where the criminals are getting them. I know that finding the owner of a stolen gun doesn't necessarily mean the criminal who stole it will be found, but it's a place to start.

It is not a place to start. It is a place to end. It does not add to the investigation at all becuase the regisrty is a dead end. Not to mention it is so messed up as to be useless in court.

You say you think that.........but you do not say why! What do you hope to gain by it? What process do you think will occur?

Even in the US (according to Law and Order LOL) when the detectives find a gun they look for the owner -- therefore there must be some kind of database with gun owner info.

Some cities and states require registraion of firarms (mainly handguns) similarly to Canada. It is interesting to note that these are also the places with the highest gun crime rates. Those area with fewer laws limiting guns and more limiting Criminals have lower crime rates. Now next time watch what they do with the info? Every time they find the owner he just has to say that it was stolen last week. The trail is a dead end.

It's not a crime to have your gun stolen.

LOL!! No not directly. It is not a crme to have your gun stolen. What they have done is make it a crime not to store your guns properly. How do they determine if they were stored properly? Well since their are zero laws to define what safe storage is. They simply say...if your guns were stolen then they were not stored properly. Nice trick eh? The result is the same. Owners are arrested and loose their rights due to the illegal actions of others.

If I find a gun on the side of the road, I'd like it to be returned to the rightful owner. How can that be done unless there's a database of owners somewhere?

Great! Damn but you are thoughtful!! That could be fixed by a registry of stolen guns. While you are at it. Can you also make sure that any DVD player or Plasma TV that is found can also be returned? Shall we spend billions more on such a system? I surely hope not.

Please don't get mad -- I'm asking these questions honestly and without malice.

No malice noted what so ever. It is obvious that you do not know the system and seem genuinely interested in the situation. I wish that there were more people of similar intent.

Cheers

( and if you live in Ontario you are cordially invited out to the range. The ammo is on me!)

[Spike22]

Bla bla bla why another committee to get rid of the registry. PM do you job and axe this lame buzzard immediately. My wallet can't take much more of these handouts to useless governement programs.

[how much will this committe to study scrapping the gun registry cost us?]

[IPSC STORM]

Bla bla bla why another committee to get rid of the registry. PM do you job and axe this lame buzzard immediately. My wallet can't take much more of these handouts to useless governement programs.

[how much will this committe to study scrapping the gun registry cost us?]

Well you simply cannot trash the existing program without something to replace it. You know nature abhors a vaccum.

Eveyone agrees that we need some sort of gun control scheme. I would just prefer to call it criminal control instead of gun control.

The CPC will generate a method that I hope ( and trust) will help decrease crime on our streets and serve as a deterent for crime. At the same time I trust that it will respect the rights of gun owners.

[Drea]

IPSC

Thanks for the response -- I'm at work now but will have more time to read it later.

yes, there should be a criminal database.

And, anyone who commits a crime (gun or not) should be in a "registry".

Cheers!

[D.B.]

Great post FTA! RACK it.

The idea of registration in theory is not objectionable...the problem for most gun-owners is that we already had full registration of handguns since the 30's, and of gun owners since the late 70's (through the former FAC and now PAL licenses). The long-gun registry was seen as a significant step towards government confiscation of firearms.

This concern was not just from the paranoid...former Justice Minister Allan Rock specifically stated that, in his view, only police and military should be able to possess a firearm in Canada.

Never realized Allan Rock was such a quack.

But then he is a hippy, so I shouldn't expect his personal view to be much different. I just can't see this as a reality in Canada... well not until the deer, the moose and the forests are all gone. So hopefully not for a little while anyway. There are too many legitimate uses for them. I am curious to hear your take possibiltiy of a hand gun ban. Maybe the sinister first step

To me, fear of a complete gun ban does sound a little tin-foil hattish. But governments are all about holding power so I don't doubt they'd make use of such a registry if it was in their best interest.

Unfortunately, all too often events like the killing of the Mounties in Mayerthorpe are used as rallying points for tighter gun control, including maintaining and expanding the long-gun registry. Logic tells you though that no such measures would have or ever could have prevented the tragedy.

I definately have to concede your point here.

Too bad it has taken blowing a couple billion dollars for the largely urban-dwelling non-gun-owning population to listen to what we were saying.

Ouch.

And we don't even have any ammo to fight back with.

[D.B.]

Great info Storm.

The only advantage of a Permit system ( which I am not dead set against) is that you can ensure training. I have some problems with forcing people to take a course but it does have some good points. However this program could easily be run by volunteers ( like myself) and could be designed by people who actualy know something about firearms. This would reduce the cost to take payers as well as make a superior course. Like the CSSA course I teach you can actually get people out shooting to see how they handle themselves. The PAL system we have I like to compare to pilots ground school. No solo flight but they hand you the keys to a plane anyway. Not very bright if you ask me. Again self managment by interested parties within constraints of law make more sense.

Well you simply cannot trash the existing program without something to replace it. You know nature abhors a vaccum.

Eveyone agrees that we need some sort of gun control scheme. I would just prefer to call it criminal control instead of gun control.

The CPC will generate a method that I hope ( and trust) will help decrease crime on our streets and serve as a deterent for crime. At the same time I trust that it will respect the rights of gun owners.

I think we can find a lot of common ground on both of these statements, because you've expressed exactly what I think the CPC should do with the registry. My only reservation is that it's a hot political topic and I hope Harper moves forward with sound decisions instead of political ones.

I don't think the 'unarmed urban masses' that FTA was refering to have any problem with people buying guns legitimately and don't want to make that more difficult... we just want a solution that stops guys from comparing their pieces in the men's room and little girls from getting shot on the street.

[IPSC STORM]

DB..............the problem is the urbanites indeed do want to take my guns.

They do not see a positive use for them.........because they have no positive experience with them.

Look, I have two kids age 12 and 15. Do I not want a safe world for them? Do I not want them to walk safely in the streets? ( mind you as mentioned above my daughter was not safe in her school).

Of course I do!

I also know a heck of a lot about firearms. I have been shooting since I was 18 ( I am now 39 and holding).

I am a qualified instructor and chief range officer.

I am not the problem. The folks at my club are not the problem.

Look at the now famous boxing day shooting. The shooters had records a mile long and were still at large.

That is the real problem. Wasting efforts and resources to chase after me is a terrible waste of time and money.

I am certain that a comproimise can be reached in everyone of interest were to get together. However that is simply not the case. We have the likes of Wendy Cukier taking govement grants ( now that will stop of course) who is now driving at the UN to take guns away from civilians.

The trick is to educate the common people. Which I guess is part of what I am attempting to do here. I work hard at this part of my hobby. I organize open houses at my club ( 430 visitors last year). I hosted a media day. I have been a guest host on a call in show on CBC.

But still there are voices out that still carping the same lies and distortions...

The problem is and always will be the Criminals. They are the ones that need to be controlled. The big problem however is controling them is not easy and it is not clean which is of course why the liberals decided to avoid it.

[Spike22]

IPSC

Thanks for the response -- I'm at work now but will have more time to read it later.

yes, there should be a criminal database.

And, anyone who commits a crime (gun or not) should be in a "registry".

Cheers!

There is already a crime registry...Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) been around for 40 years.

So what is your point?

[IPSC STORM]

CPIC is very limited.

Once an individual has "paid their due" and are no longer on parole. They are free to move about Canada on a whim.

Meanwhile as I stated above I am not given this freedom.

Do you realize that there are some 100,000 people in Canada who are prohibitted form owning firearms?

Do you know that the government has absolutely no idea where they are?

Now here is an idea.

Keep track of those who are not to be trusted with firarms due to earlier actions.

Then...............check their homes not mine!

If you find a gun in their home...............they go go jail again.

If you come to my house. You know for a certainty that I have guns so what are you looking for? What possible gain is their to the system?

I should also point out that CPIC is directly connected to the CFC data bank and has been hacked some 308 times in the past few years. There is some conjecture that his is the reason behind the spate of robberies of collectors homes in the GTA. At one point last week I understand CPIC was hacked for a period of 8 hours ( but this is hearsay).